CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 394Health, psychology, and well-beingOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingBehavioral Health and Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.

Health, Coping, and Well-being: Perspectives From Social Comparison Theory

Buunk, Bram P.·2013·Psychology Press eBooks
DOI 10.4324/9780203774106
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Over the past decades, the field of health psychology has witnessed a tremendous growth, and social psychologists have contributed substantially to the theoretical foundation of this field. Their research has focused on a wide variety of health-relevant topics such as how individuals decide to respond to threats to their health and well-being, how and why they change their behavior to avoid such threats, and especially, how they adjust to or cope with the risk of threatening disease and with the diseases themselves. As diverse as this literature may be, however, there does appear to be a common theme throughout much of it--the observation that comparison of oneself and one's health status and coping efforts with others is an integral part of the coping process. Consequently, social comparison theory is increasingly becoming recognized as a fruitful framework for illuminating health related issues. A still expanding literature is exploring the role of social comparisons with respect to coping with a wide range of health problems, including cancer, physical decline among the aged, rheumatoid arthritis, AIDS, stress at work and occupational burnout, and eating disorders. Social comparison theory has augmented knowledge about the ways in which people cope with stressful events, and thus has contributed significantly to it. At a more basic level, research in this applied context has made significant contributions to the development of social comparison theory itself. The present volume presents an overview of the various ways in which social comparison theory has been applied to issues related to health, coping, and well-being, and also points out how these applications have contributed to our insight into the way humans employ social comparison information. Given the attention paid to theoretical and applied issues, this volume will appeal to a wide audience, including social and health psychologists, as well as therapists, physicians, clinicians, medical sociologists, nurses, and those involved in the growing field of nursing research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4324/9780203774106

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–394 of 394

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Buunk, B. P.
Corresponding author
Buunk, Bram P.
Venue
Psychology Press eBooks
Publisher
Psychology Press
Published
2013-05-13
DOI
10.4324/9780203774106
OpenAlex
W2121726359
Cited by
393
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14
FWCI
15.33
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychology Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, psychology, and well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
social comparison theory, health psychology, coping, well-being, health behavior change, disease risk, cancer, aging, rheumatoid arthritis, AIDS, occupational stress, burnout, eating disorders, social comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review